Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 3 Mar 1949

Vol. 114 No. 6

Private Deputies' Business. - Natural Resources of the Country—Motion (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:—

That Dáil Éireann considers that action should be taken without delay to obtain a survey of the natural resources of the country with a view to their early development—(Deputies Connolly and McAuliffe).

Mr. Connolly

I was giving to the House last night a brief résumé of the attitude of the Labour Party for a considerable period to this question of an organised survey of the resources of the country with a view to their speedy development. I instanced the first elaboration of that idea in the constructive programme issued by the Labour Party 13 years ago. This was followed as a matter of dealing with the emergency, by another document entitled Planning for the Crisis issued in 1940. I may say that in every election programme of the Party, and in particular, in the programme for the 1943 election, there was embodied, among other demands, a demand for a survey with a view to the development and utilisation of the nation's resources.

To our mind the principal work of the Dáil and of the Government should be directed towards these questions of economic importance. The scope for such a survey is extremely large. One could dilate upon it for a considerable time but I do not propose to delay the time of the House in an attempt even to sketch in the basis of that survey. The arguments that I have adduced already I believe to be sufficient to show the necessity for some authoritative body giving us the basis, the facts and the figures on which any plans can be erected.

It is heartening in one respect to know that the Statistical Branch will enlarge its activities, will cope with the demand for more detailed information and thus may function to assist the industrial authority to which I referred in the first portion of my speech. However, even that to my mind would not be sufficient, and would not give us what this motion asks for. It is just one of many indications of the method of tackling these various problems which have been pronounced over a number of years and have led to lamentable results. Everyone in this House, for instance, is interested in the economic development of the country and in particular in that development as a means of providing employment, as a means of breaking the back of this problem of unemployment which has consumed the time of this House and the energies of Ministers and the Government for many years. To my mind we have not yet, even after 20 years, got that basic information that would be essential to dealing with this problem in a manner that might possibly hold out a solution for it.

We had to-day, on an Estimate, an inquiry by Deputy Lemass in regard to certain aspects of the unemployment figures. I have every sympathy with him and with any other Deputy who desires information on every aspect of that matter, who wants it fully analysed, who wants these figures brought into a perspective that will give us a real view of the situation, because only by doing so can we possibly harness the resources of the country in a proper manner. As the Minister said, there is a hard core of this unemployment problem. Up to now, it appears we have not taken cognisance of how that hard core should be shifted or whether that hard core is a permanent feature of the present capitalist system obtaining in this country. Governments may take credit for an abatement of unemployment; Governments may be blamed for an increase in unemployment but what we really require to know and what we should know, as a basis for any real development of the country, is the type of unemployment which can be solved by economic and Governmental measures. There was instanced to-day the fact that, of applicants for unemployment assistance, from 28 to 30 per cent. came from poor areas along the western seaboard. In these areas there is not any type of industrial employment which could be considered as giving constant employment to the people resident there. In other words, as understood by economists in the past at least, this is a peculiar type of unemployment that bears very little relationship to the unemployment existing in any of the large cities and along the eastern coast. The effect on the individual may be the same. He may be deprived of his livelihood; he may have to rely on the State for assistance but, from the point of view of economic development, from the point of view of what can be done, it is quite obvious that this mass unemployment there cannot be looked upon in the same manner in which one looks upon the seasonal or temporary unemployment that takes place along the eastern seaboard and in the main industrial towns.

It is questions like these that a survey such as is indicated by the motion, as being required, would bring to light. Problems like these would be thoroughly analysed. We would get the full facts of the matter and, at the same time by an examination of the resources in these areas, it could be the task of some planning commission or some industrial authority to relate the particular type of unemployment to the actual needs of that countryside and the potentialities of that countryside for the abatement of that peculiar type of unemployment.

It may be that it is only by some particular type of home craft or home industry that some little inroad might be made upon that. On the other hand, it would be much more feasible to my mind and more likely to break the back of the problem if large works of public importance could be undertaken in those areas. Up to the present time there is very little data on which to base any real plans for those areas. There are fugitive reports here and there and there are schemes for re-afforestation and for different types of works in those areas. Whether they have any reality or not in relation to the natural resources of those various areas, the climatic possibilities and all the other factors that have to be taken into account, is a matter of opinion. They could be only definitely solved or put upon a practical plane by the establishment of such a survey as I have indicated.

Finally, I want to say that this question is as urgent as any question could be. We have in the past indicated what has been done in other countries. On the famous occasion when I drew the attention of the House to what is being done in New Zealand the then Minister for Finance, the present President, Seán T. Ó Ceallaigh, gave reasons why this country could not be compared with New Zealand and desired to hear no more about New Zealand. If we take his objections as valid, we can retreat from that idea of comparing what has been done by a Labour Government in New Zealand to something near home and seek in Denmark, for instance, what possibly might be some inspiration to us in regard to this matter of national development.

No one, I think, who has any acquaintance with the situation of these two countries will fail to agree that the situation in Denmark is far more unfavourable than it is here. They have not the fertility, they have not the natural resources that we have. But they have, by their planning and by development, been able to do far better than our industry or our agriculture has been able to do. They have not the possibility of re-afforestation that we have. Most parts of their country is swept by very severe wind which retards growth. Their growing season, not only with regard to trees, but every other from of plant life, is far shorter than ours. They have no natural resources such as we have.

They are in the same position as we are in regard to coal, they have to import coal as we do but, as well as that, they have not the possibility of hydro-electric development such as we have. They have to produce their electricity from imported coal or to obtain the electricity from neighbouring countries, such as Germany. Yet, despite all these disadvantages and many others which could be mentioned in relation to a comparison with this country, Denmark is able to maintain, with a far higher standard of living than we have in this country, twice as many persons to the square mile as we can maintain. That, I think, is some sort of indication that a small country can do a lot better than some of the pessimists think.

If we do harness our resources in this country, there is no reason why we should not step up the productivity of the country; there is no reason why we should not maintain a greater number of persons to the square mile. We want to get a basis for all that by such a survey as is asked for in this motion. I cannot see that the Government will seriously resist this motion and, if it does meet with the approbation of the Dáil, I think that this type of work is work that should commend itself to the people of the country, not only as a temporary measure but as something of a far-reaching significant fact. I therefore recommend it for acceptance to the House.

Mr. Cogan

A patriotic poet has written:

"Breathes there a man with soul so dead,

Who never to himself hath said:

‘This is my own, my native land.'"

An Ceann Comhairle

Is the Deputy seconding the motion?

Mr. Cogan

I second the motion. It is impossible to address oneself to this motion without, first of all, saying to oneself: "This is my own, my native land." All that is in this country, all its resources are for us to develop to the fullest extent and utilise for the benefit of our nation, for our people and for posterity. In my opinion, this motion is very wide and far-reaching in its scope. It covers almost everything from the centre of the earth below this island to the sky. When I say this island, I mean this island, because in considering our resources we should ignore the temporary boundary which divides our country. The great resources of this country which Deputy Connolly suggests that we should survey might be divided into three main groups: first of all, the people of this country, who are the greatest resource that any nation can have; secondly, the land of the country; and thirdly, our industrial and mineral resources. In that regard, we have in our people a resource which other nations might envy. We talk about the overcrowded condition of the western seaboard; we talk about the overcrowded condition in the immediate vicinity of the mouth of the Liffey, and we fail to realise that the people who overcrowd these areas and the people who are sparsely scattered over the rural areas are amongst the best in the world. Given the opportunity, they can do great things in this country. That is why it is so urgently necessary that we should accept the spirit of this motion and survey our further resources calmly and dispassionately.

The land is the next great resource. It is on the few inches of soil spread more or less evenly over the face of our country that our people will have to depend mainly for their existence. What is wrong with the land is that it is impoverished, short of the necessary fertilisers and the mineral ingredients which make for maximum production. Into the land we must put phosphates and lime and from it, so far as possible, we must take the surface water which tends to deteriorate such a large area of the country.

As regards the full utilisation of the land, I do not intend to dwell on that aspect of our national life. I consider that this motion is mainly concerned with other of our resources than land. We can seek to ensure that our industrial potentialities are developed to their maximum. First of all, it is essential I think, that there should be a spirit of confidence in our capacity to produce and, secondly, of products which it is essential to produce. Any spirit of defeatism should be eliminated from the mentality of our people. It is a true fact that the people who are engaged in non-productive work in this country form a very large section of the total population. They include the best educated and brainiest section of our people because non-productive occupations almost invariably yield a higher income than that which is available to the producer whether in industry or agriculture. We have in our professional classes, in our Civil Service, and in our commercial classes a huge section of people, well educated and influential and with considerable wealth, and yet adding little or nothing to the actual wealth of the country. Amongst that big section we have a sort of ingrained prejudice against the producer whether he be an Irish farmer or manufacturer. It is impossible for one to mix with these non-producing sections without finding amongst them a certain contempt for both the farmer and the manufacturer. I do not know how that mentality originated, but there is no doubt that it exists and that it is detrimental both to agricultural and to industrial progress. Until we can instil into our people, young and old, and particularly the young, a spirit of confidence in the Irish producer, in the ability of Irish people to produce goods and commodities as efficiently as anybody else, it will be difficult to make progress and to increase the output of the nation.

I believe that in the case of our industrial resources there is a wide scope for development. A number of manufacturing industries have been established here over the past 25 years. It is essential that those engaged in them should be given the clearest and most emphatic assurance that their rights will be safeguarded in the future, and that the whole nation will be behind them in their efforts to make their industries more efficient and more capable of delivering the goods which the country requires. Lack of confidence amongst those engaged in productive industry always makes for inefficiency. If workers feel that the industry in which they are engaged is likely to collapse at any time, they cannot give of their best or become really efficient. In the same way, if owners believe that there is no real security they cannot go all out to develop their industries and plough back into them more capital or more of their profits. I think that these are the first essentials to industrial development.

I am not so enthusiastic about too much surveying, controlling or regulating. I believe you cannot develop any industry without taking considerable risks. Too much planning often defeats its own purpose. I knew a farmer who planned an ideal farmhouse and outoffices. The buildings were so efficiently designed that they would be the most efficient that could be thought of. He spent years drawing up plans but never got down to the actual work. Every time that he finished a plan he found that there was some little defect in it, and then set about making something more perfect on paper. The point is that one has to get down to the actual work in order to achieve anything. That is why I say it is better that industries should be established which may be not entirely perfect rather than that we should go on planning and planning and do nothing practical. Provided reasonable security is given, I believe that private enterprise is capable of very wide development in the industrial field. I believe that, if there is reasonable security for industries which have been established and for others which may be found desirable, they will go on producing until they are in a position to supply the country's needs and perhaps compete with each other, thus providing the competition which is so essential for industrial efficiency.

I do not believe in the idea that protection, either by tariffs or quotas, is something that should be applied only to infant industries and then be completely withdrawn. Protection means more than that. It is the idea that our nation should stand up for its own native industries, and that even though an industry may be established for a long time it should not be exposed at any time to unfair competition. Take, for example, such industries as those engaged in the manufacture of woollen goods, clothing and boots. It would not be fair or right, even though our own industries in these lines were long established that they should be exposed to unfair competition from some outside source. These are ideas which, I think, the Minister will agree with. Still I think it is necessary that they should be stated. There will always, of course, be the danger that in certain sections of our industrial life there may be a certain amount of exploitation either by the owners of industry or the skilled workers engaged in it. Exploitation can take place by either of these sections and must be guarded against. It is necessary to guard against exploitation by those engaged in the production of a key raw material for industry. A great deal of the trouble during the emergency arose from the fact that people engaged in the production of key raw materials exploited their position and thus held the industry and the community up to ransom.

An Ceann Comhairle

Will the Deputy relate that to a survey of the natural resources?

Mr. Cogan

I think I am surveying the position as broadly as possible.

An Ceann Comhairle

I was not aware that tariffs were a natural resource.

Mr. Cogan

At first glance, I assumed that natural resources meant mineral resources but, on reading the motion and listening to Deputy Connolly, I am convinced that it has a much wider meaning. In considering natural resources we should contemplate broadly the type of industry which is desirable. I do not believe that industrial efficiency can be secured only through mass production. There can be a considerable degree of efficiency in the small type of industry and in having industries distributed throughout the country.

If the discussion on this motion were confined to mineral resources I would direct the Minister's attention to County Wicklow where there are valuable mineral deposits which have been developed and utilised over a long period of years. It is absolutely essential that exploration and development should continue until the extent of the minerals in the area is discovered exactly. That work should be carried out by the State as there is no mining firm in this country that has the necessary capital to engage in exploration on a large scale. I hope the Minister will have something to say about the future of the Avoca mining area. I am interested in this particular area, not only from the point of view of the employment entailed in the development and utilisation of the mines, but also from the point of view of using to the best possible advantage the natural resources.

There is also the question of anthracite deposits in the Leinster area. During the emergency we realised the value of native coal and it is essential that we should take all possible steps to develop the mines to the fullest possible extent. During the emergency there was a shortage of skilled workers in the industry. We should guard against that by steady and progressive development. We must bear in mind that it is vitally necessary to enlarge the supply of native fuel. Fuel and power are vitally necessary. Supplies of native fuel can be very largely expanded by the development of machine won peat. It should be possible to extend the use of machinery to the smaller bogs and even to privatelyowned bogs. That is a matter which would require some consideration. The question of producing a small type of machine for turf production should be considered. Consideration should be given also to the development of our power resources. Nothing should be left undone during the next few years, when plans may be developed for schemes of electrification.

These are some of the thoughts which occur to one in connection with this motion. We want from the Government actual work. We want, first, the fullest encouragement given to private enterprise and, secondly, large-scale development of those branches of enterprise which cannot be undertaken by the private individual and which are urgently necessary.

An Ceann Comhairle

I would remind the House that the question must be put at 8.20.

Minister for Industry and Commerce (Mr. Morrissey)

I have not any difficulty whatever in accepting this motion and I think it was well that the motion was put down. It certainly gave Deputy Connolly an opportunity of covering the whole field very fully and that was an example which Deputy Cogan was very glad to be able to follow. However, I am glad to say that the position is not quite as bad as one might gather, listening to Deputy Connolly's speech, because the Deputy seemed to suggest that no survey had been made in this country and that we had very little information—if any at all—regarding our natural resources. It is, perhaps, true to say that we have not as much information regarding our natural resources, particularly on the mineral side, as we would like to have, but it is only fair to say that geologically the survey of this country has been completed some years ago and the geological surveyors are engaged all the time in revising and supplementing the information which they have got. It is also true to say that we have a considerable amount of information regarding whatever coal deposits there are in the country and we have a lot of information about what is, perhaps, the most valuable, and what is certainly the most extensive, deposit in the country, namely, gypsum. That deposit is probably one of the most valuable deposits in Europe. That should not be anything new to the House, because I am only repeating a statement which my predecessor made here some time ago. I would like to inform the House that the very extensive drilling and boring which is still going on on that deposit is being paid for by the State. The work is being done by, I think, a Swedish firm under the supervision of our own geological survey, and I am informed that that work will be completed within the next six or 12 months. Deputies are probably aware that two companies at least are working some of the gypsum deposits and one of the reasons why the present boring and drilling operations are being carried on is to ensure that the further working and development of that deposit will be done on a properly planned basis.

As far as coal is concerned in the Leinster area, Castlecomer is being worked as usual and worked, as far as I know, to the fullest extent. The State is paying for the work that is being carried out at Slievardagh to a maximum of £50,000, and a new pocket or shaft has been opened up in a different part of that district. We are hoping that coal of a fairly good quality may be discovered which may be worked as a commercial proposition. At the moment I cannot say more than that. As Deputies know, Arigna coal is being worked to some extent by private enterprise and a fair quantity of that coal is being marketed, though mainly, I am afraid, to State or semi-State companies.

A private company has started work at Silvermines in North Tipperary and zinc and lead are the main commodities which they expect to get there. There will, perhaps, be other minerals also and those people seem to have faith in the future of that particular deposit and are backing it with their own money. The position at Avoca is that the Government have decided to go ahead with what was planned up to a point. We had further concentrations and we got further information from the experts employed by Mianraí Teoranta and work has been authorised to the extent which, they say, will be necessary to enable them to say whether it would be desirable to go any further. The experts informed the Government that for an expenditure of £120,000 they believed they would be able to say whether the project should be dropped altogether or else make a recommendation that it would be desirable to expend further moneys on it to continue the workings another stage. That is the position about Avoca. Work is going on there and it will continue up to that point. I do not know whether I am leaving out any other mineral area or not. It is a question, as Deputy Connolly said, of our natural resources.

Deputies are aware that it was announced during the last couple of weeks that the Government had decided to proceed with the full development scheme planned by Bord na Móna, that is the first development scheme with provision for increased cost over and above the original scheme, the provision of 2,000 houses and the second development scheme. That was decided, as Deputies were informed, to secure at the end of ten years an output of machine turf of approximately 2,000,000 tons.

Deputy Connolly and Deputy Cogan spoke about the necessity for land development and land reclamation and I do not think there is any issue there on any side of the House. I think we are all clearly of the opinion that the land of this country has not been developed and that even that part of it which is arable is not being worked either to the fullest or the best purpose. It would also be agreed that not merely hundreds of thousands but millions of acres of land in this country are now practically useless but that they could be made fully productive, by drainage mainly, and by liming, manuring, clearing rock and scrub and so on. The Government scheme in that direction has been announced. The Government proposes to embark on a scheme over a ten-year period which, we hope, will lead to the reclamation of somewhere in the neighbourhood of 4,000,000 acres of land.

That is more than one-third of our present total acreage of arable land. That scheme envisages more than merely draining or reclaiming in the sense of clearing scrub and rock and other obstruction. It will also liven the land, where necessary, and there will be a certain amount of fertilising of that reclaimed land. I think myself that that is a scheme of great magnitude. It is a scheme that will be of immense and lasting value to this country and it will develop in the most practical way our greatest natural resource.

We have also announced our intention to step up as quickly as it is humanly possible to do so the acreage to be put under trees, with a minimum target of 25,000 acres per year. That is not going to be easy. That is not going to be done overnight. I am speaking now from recollection, but I understand that up to this year our highest annual acreage in that connection was somewhere in the neighbourhood of 6,000 acres. I do not profess to be an expert—indeed, I do not profess to know a great deal about forestry. Nevertheless, Deputies may recollect that I have always been a bit interested in it. I have invariably spoken on the Forestry Estimate in this House because I never could understand, and I cannot understand, why greater progress in planting was not made in the last 25 years. Unquestionably the necessity for it is there. Undoubtedly the land which is suitable for afforestation and not suitable for anything else is there, and there is no question but that the labour is there. However, as far as this Government is concerned, we are aiming at that target. We believe it can be done and we certainly are going to do our best to get it done.

There was a great deal of talk about Irish industry, about Irish industrial development, about lack of confidence, about unfair treatment of people engaged in industry, and so forth. Deputy Cogan told us that a clear assurance should be given to Irish industrialists to the effect that they would get that measure of protection which would enable them not merely to start but to develop their industries. If there is any person, industrialist or otherwise, in this country to-day who is in doubt as to the position of this Government in relation to Irish industrial development then that person is in doubt only because he wants to be in doubt and only because he refuses to see or to listen. I certainly have tried to the best of my ability to make my position and the position of this Government in relation to the development and future of Irish industry as clear as I possibly could. The Taoiseach himself at the annual dinner of the Federation of Irish Industries and on other occasions also, but particularly on that occasion, made the position, in my opinion, crystal clear. The attitude of the previous Government to the development of Irish industry is well known. The attitude of this Government is, I believe, equally well known. I want to say here what I said at the annual meeting of the Federation of Irish Industries. No Irish industrialist and no person who is thinking of starting an industrial project in this country need have any fears from the point of view of Government policy. I went further and I said that he need have no fears not merely from the policy of this Government but, so far as I could see, from that of any Government that is likely to succeed it. If there is lack of confidence to-day—if there is—it is due entirely to the fact that certain Irish industrialists and other people who are not industrialists are deliberately and maliciously mixing politics with industry. There is no question whatever about that and there is no doubt about it.

I know that there was a deliberate campaign—it is weakening; it is dying out—to create that very lack of confidence in the hope that industrialists who were contemplating starting industry here would not start and in the hope that existing industrialists who were thinking of expanding and taking on additional employees would not do so. That is a very dangerous game to be playing, whether that game is being played by industrialists or by politicians and, frankly, it is not fair that that should be used as a political weapon. It is not fair to the country. It is not fair to the industrialists and it is not fair to those who are dependent upon these industries for their livelihood. If there is any Deputy in this House or any industrialist either inside or outside the House who is in doubt about any specific point relating to the policy of this Government in connection with the development or future of Irish industry then I would be glad if that point were put specifically. But nobody, of course, believes that everything in connection with Irish industry is 100 per cent. right. I do not believe it. My predecessor in office did not believe it. The previous Government did not believe it. That was one of the reasons why they introduced the Efficiency Bill. Am I to be taken, therefore, as being antagonistic to Irish industry if I say that whilst we are prepared to give the fullest measure of protection necessary to protect a sound Irish industry we are not going to put a protective wall around inefficiency in this country? I am not prepared to do that and my predecessor was not prepared to do it, as he made perfectly clear.

I do not want to have my words twisted when I say, as I have said on more than one occasion, that industries, and particularly certain industries, in this country cannot expect to remain all the time in the nursery, that some day or another they are expected to grow up and must be expected to stand on their own feet. If statements such as these are to be construed as exhibiting antagonism towards Irish industry and the development of Irish industry, or as showing a desire to injure Irish industry, and if Irish industrialists are so deficient in intelligence as to swallow that sort of propaganda, then I am afraid it is difficult to see them in the rôle of efficient industrialists.

This Government has shown in many ways its desire to see industry develop and expand, and we came to the conclusion very shortly after our election as a Government that there was something lacking in regard to the measures necessary, if Irish industrial development was to be brought to the pitch to which we hoped it would be brought and all believed it should be brought, within a comparatively short time. Irish industry has made very little expansion in the past ten or 12 years and I have no hesitation in saying that one of the things that shocked me in connection with it recently was the discovery that, in respect of protected industry, no fewer than 51,000 duty-free licences had to be issued for the import of goods, and I say that, on the face of it, that indicates that there is something wrong, and radically wrong.

If the rate of industrial expansion and development was to be accelerated, it was quite clear that there was a necessity for a body such as the body the Government has announced its intention of setting up, the industrial development authority. It is because we want to see that that work will be done thoroughly and expeditiously that it was decided that this body should be a full-time body and it is because we decided that the work should be done thoroughly, expeditiously and well that we decided also that, so far as it was possible to secure the men, nobody would be a member of that board except a person with practical experience, a person with knowledge of industry and industrial development and a person deeply interested in that drive towards the fullest possible development of manufacturing processes in this country.

That board has been given very wide terms of reference and it will be given every assistance, but naturally it will be expected thoroughly to investigate every project put before it. Nobody will question that. I do not think anybody will question this statement that, up to now, there was not in existence in this country any body or any machine equipped to make that thorough examination of applications which were made for various forms of protection, nor was the machinery available to make those searching inquiries which should be made, and certainly there was not available any body which could of itself initiate anything, which could, as the motion says, survey the country and see if it was possible that a particular industry— let it be small or large—should be started in a particular part of the country, to see whether there was in that part of the country some native raw material which could be processed here and no body whose duty it was to bring to the notice of would-be industrialists or promoters the possibilities of any particular area. That was the position as I saw it and that is another reason for the establishment of this board.

This board will have a big job to do. It will have perhaps the most important task from a national economic point of view that was ever entrusted to any board. It will need the help, the assistance and the co-operation of everybody who is interested in the development of what is called the industrial arm. It will have to examine what very often could not be examined as fully as it should have been and what cannot be examined as fully to-day as it should be, the impact which the imposition of certain duties or quotas may have upon other industries, and very often other protected industries. Of course, above all, we must have machinery which will see effectively that the consumer will not have to pay one halfpenny more than he should reasonably be expected to pay. Now, again, I hope that that will not be distorted into an accusation of profiteering or looting against Irish industrialists, but I am afraid that, too often, people talk as if there were only one side to this problem, as if the consumer side were hardly worthy of consideration. I should say also that, for the sake of Irish industry, one of the duties of a board such as this would be to see that a particular industry was producing the best quality article that it was possible for that industry to produce. I am not talking about comparisons now, or of what is produced in New York or London or somewhere else. It should be producing up to the quality which it is competent or able to produce.

Another very important side of this matter for which there was no proper organisation and which is not only desirable but, in my opinion, very necessary, if not essential, was to ascertain the effect and the use being made of protection, no matter in what shape it was given, over a number of years, to ascertain whether that protection was being utilised by the person who got it for the purpose for which it was given originally, or whether, having reached a certain point where he was deriving a fairly decent profit, he was merely quite happy and was sitting down behind that protective wall and making no real effort so to expand his particular industry as to meet the requirements of the Irish market. Those are just a few of the matters—I will probably have another opportunity of discussing the industrial development authority—with which they will have to deal.

Reference was made—and I was glad it was made—to the prejudice which undoubtedly exists in this country against Irish products. Deputy Cogan said it existed against agricultural products as well as against industrial products.

Mr. Cogan

It exists against the producer, but not against the products.

Mr. Morrissey

I do not believe it exists against the producer, either, as far as the agricultural side is concerned. There is no doubt whatever that there is a blind prejudice there against Irish industrial products. There is no doubt that there are people in this country—and, in particular, there are distributors in this country—who never lose an opportunity of belittling the article merely because it is produced here at home. That is something that all of us ought to try and put an end to and we ought to kill it. The best way to kill it and the most effective way of killing it is for the Irish industrialist to put an article of the best quality he is able to produce on the market. But there must be more than merely the article itself being of the highest quality: it must be marketed in the right way. Very often an article of the very highest quality is so badly marketed, so badly presented for sale, that the inferior article, which is more attractively marketed or more nicely boxed and papered, is bought at a higher price in preference to the superior Irish article. I know that that prejudice obtains; and, for some extraordinary reason, within the past two or three years, it has been on the increase, I think. I would like to see some sort of a national campaign started to break down that prejudice.

We have all heard of people who have bought a commodity made in Ireland and who have complained bitterly about the finish or about the bad quality, but they usually content themselves with complaining to their neighbours or writing letters to the evening papers. Now, if they would only send some of the samples of badly made, badly produced or badly finished articles to my Department or to the Federation of Manufacturers or to some public representative, so that that article could be brought straight home to the manufacturer and he could be asked to account for it, then they would be doing a much more effective piece of work, to ensure that that type of article would not again appear on the market here, than if they wrote a hundred letters to the papers.

I do not want to take any more of the time, as other Deputies want to speak and there is only a limited time on this motion; but I would like to say this, in conclusion. I have faith in the future industrial development of this country. I believe there is a wide field there yet to be tilled and I believe there are many commodities that we are now importing that we could produce ourselves. All I can say—and apparently it does not penetrate—is that, as far as I am concerned as Minister for Industry and Commerce, I am prepared to recommend to the Government the fullest measure of protection that is necessary for the development of any sound industry. Let me be quite clear on this, and nobody knows this better than my predecessor. There are many projects put up to the Department of Industry and Commerce that no Minister with any sense of responsibility would recommend to a Government or would stand over, and there are many applications made for protection that no Minister would recommend or stand over. I do not think that will be contested. I want to suggest that we are not helping the development of Irish industry by trying to make merely a political plaything out of it. We are getting an opportunity—when I say "we," I do not mean the present Government: I mean this present generation—for the development of our country that no previous generation of Irishmen got. I believe that, if we settle down to the job, we can make a very marked advance, but it requires co-operation and understanding.

It also requires that certain industrialists in this country—there are few I am glad to say—will get rid of the belief that this State protects their industry merely to enable them to put more money in their pockets. There are certain industrialists in this country who believe that protection is given to themselves personally. It is not. It is given by the State because it is believed that it is in the national interest to do so. Whilst this Government is not averse to any industrialists or anybody engaged in commerce or trade in this country making reasonable profits or even generous profits, it certainly will not tolerate people who are trying to get away with profits which are utterly unreasonable. I do not want to say any more on that line at the moment. There will be other opportunities. However, industrialists and would-be industrialists ought to get this into their heads. There is no political Party in this House, or in this country so far as I know that is not in favour of protection for Irish industry. There is no political Party in this House so far as I know that is not desirous of seeing industry expanded and developed in this country. As we have said on more than one occasion, the development of the industrial arm is the only alternative to the emigrant ship. This country never could, cannot now and never will, in my opinion, be able to accommodate all its people on the land. The people who cannot be accommodated on the land must be put into industry either in this country or in some other country.

Mr. Lemass

When Deputy Connolly, in the course of his speech proposing this motion, told us that he was going to outline briefly the Labour Party's plan for national economic development I thought that this debate was going to get a rather historic significance because it is a plan we have all been waiting to hear. It emerged that the plan is the old one of establishing a council to prepare a plan. All my life or, at any rate, all during the famous 16 years to which so many references are made in this House, I have fought this idea of a national economic council. It is the panacea of theorists but it is the nightmare of planners. Industrial development in this country has enough obstacles to overcome before it gets going. Drop this idea of a council. It is not merely a fifth wheel to a coach. A coach with five wheels could conceivably move. It is like asking the racehorse to win the Derby harnessed to a plough. What do we want with a council? Set up a dozen councils with the general functions to which Deputy Connolly refers and the only thing they can do is to interfere with the work of men and organisations that are already there doing the precise things that have to be done. A survey of our natural resources, if it is related to material things, will be concerned with minerals, water-power and turf. If it is related to activities it will cover things like drainage and afforestation. I have not assumed that the Deputy contemplated a survey of agricultural resources. There is, of course, a need, and perhaps the only need that is not met by an existing organisation, for what I might call a man-power survey and to which I will refer briefly later. For mineral exploration there exists an organisation with adequate legal powers to carry out all the exploration that is required. The extent of its prospective activities has been planned by experts. I congratulate the Government upon their change of mind with regard to that development programme. Now that they have changed their mind and are prepared to authorise Mianraí Teoranta to cope with the exploration work that was planned I have no fear that they will not give it enough money. It has been my experience that once mineral exploration is started upon the danger is that it will be continued long after the reasonable possibility of discovering workable minerals has passed, rather than stop too soon.

Mr. Morrissey

That is why we took precautions.

Mr. Lemass

I thought I had taken all necessary precautions before proposing the Bill to the Dáil. So far as water-power plans are concerned the Electricity Supply Board is fully authorised to explore them and is exploring them. There is one doubt in my mind in that regard. The demand for electricity in this country grew rapidly in each year before the war. I assumed personally, and I think the experts of the Electricity Supply Board, while more conservative than I, were nevertheless prepared to agree that the annual increase in the demand for current after the war would be double or nearly double the pre-war increase. On that basis the five electricity generating stations which were planned during the war and which are now under construction will, when completed, be barely sufficient to meet the electricity demand existing when completed. In the following year there will again be a deficiency in generation capacity which, if it is to be met, will require the construction of a new station to come into operation that year, which must be planned about this time. It is, of course, a rather technical matter to relate generation capacity to production capacity because in this country, where water-power stations are backed by steam stations, there always may be at any one time a generation capacity sufficient to meet the immediate demand.

On the basis of reasonable safeguards against the possibility of a very dry season which would reduce the water-power stations' capacity and other difficulties arising at the same time, we will, in 1951 or 1952, be in the position that we will have inadequate generation capacity unless the programme of new generation stations which was prepared during the war is expanded now and the necessary steps taken to bring a new station into production in that year or very shortly after that.

Mr. Morrissey

The Deputy is aware of that.

Mr. Lemass

I know that the Electricity Supply Board has been preparing plans for the development of various rivers but the actual formation of the detailed proposals for development takes a long time and although the legal process of approval was curtailed by the 1944 Act there is still a process to be followed. I am glad also that the Government has decided to proceed with the larger machine turf programme which the board proposed in 1947. I am anxious, however, to get some information from the Minister in that regard. Because of their hesitation about proceeding with that plan last year, one year was lost. We are now into the beginning of the turf-production season of 1949 and, as I understand it, the board will not have the capital resources to embark upon that larger programme until legislation has been passed by the Dáil. It is unlikely that that legislation can be passed and brought into effect in time to increase these production activities in this year, but it is obviously desirable that there should be no delay about producing the legislation; otherwise another year will be lost.

Mr. Morrissey

There will be no avoidable delay.

Mr. Lemass

So far as drainage is concerned, there was a drainage commission. Drainage is not a matter similar to the development of a material resource like turf. It is something that can be examined from the point of view of preparing a general strategic plan. Once that was done the implementation of that strategic plan in each catchment area was entrusted to the Board of Works. I do not think that establishing an economic council will improve upon the work which the Board of Works is capable of doing in that regard.

As for afforestation, I think it is not sufficient for the Minister to say that the Government propose to step-up the rate of planting from 6,000 to 10,000 or 25,000 acres a year. That is not the point. The point is, will the Government use for afforestation purposes lands which they can get voluntarily, or will they acquire land compulsorily? If you are going to rely on land voluntarily offered for afforestation, there is no use talking about any particular target, because the area that can be planted depends on the amount of land available. If you acquire land compulsorily, I advise you that you are stirring up a great deal of difficulty for yourselves, because where land is acquired compulsorily there is always local opposition to its acquisition and that local opposition has, on occasions in the past, been demonstrated in the form of the destruction of the young plantations.

The issue for the Government on afforestation, therefore, is whether they will confine themselves to the area of land that can be voluntarily acquired for the purpose, or whether they will take the step that we would not take of compulsory acquisition. My recollection is that the aim of the Forestry Department in our time was to step-up planting upon the basis of land voluntarily acquired to 10,000 acres a year and our advice was that 10,000 acres a year would in the course of time yield all the commercial timber that would be required industrially here. I do not want to discourage the Government from going further than 10,000 acres in the year. If it can be done, it will not be a directly commercial undertaking, although it may be justified and even have commercial advantages from the point of view of scenic improvement.

I do not propose to discuss the Government's proposal with regard to the establishment of an industrial advisory council because, even despite what the Minister said, I do not know enough about it to express a definite view. I understood the Minister to say that this advisory council will have functions similar to those of the old Tariff Commission.

Mr. Morrissey

I did not say any such thing. Of course, the Deputy is bringing out the old Tariff Commission as part of the game that is going on.

Mr. Lemass

If the Minister agrees with me that it is not desirable that we should reconstitute, under any name or in any form, the old Tariff Commission, we can start off to examine this proposition, with the prospect of arriving at some common view.

Mr. Morrissey

There is no desire to revive the old Tariff Commission, and the Deputy knows it.

Mr. Lemass

I understood the Minister to say that any person proposing to the Government to engage in industrial activity which would require protection or assistance would be required to go to this advisory council and have the proposition thoroughly examined there. That is what the old Tariff Commission did. It did it in a very elaborate and roundabout way. The objection to it was not the procedure that was followed, but because it necessitated this prior examination by such a body of proposals for industrial development before action was taken by the Government. If that is going to be the position here, then it will be impossible in times of normal trade to prevent the forestalling of Government action through the importation of substantial quantities of the goods concerned and there will be, in fact, very little gain to the Government.

The trouble never was to examine the case made by persons seeking protection. That examination was carried out efficiently in the past by the officers of the Department of Industry and Commerce. The case put forward by everybody who got Government assistance in that form looked to be a good case and no amount of investigation could have demonstrated that it was not. The only trouble that arose was that occasionally the plans of the industrial promoters did not work out precisely as they had anticipated, and honestly anticipated. Their costs proved to be higher; their capital expenditure was greater than anticipated and ultimately they came to say: "You gave us assistance on the understanding that our prices would be equivalent to the prices in Great Britain. We find we cannot do it and we will have to go 5 or 10 per cent. above the British prices." Your Tariff Commission could never find that out in advance.

I have no objection to that body investigating the desirability of continuing protection to any industry or requiring protected industries to justify the continuation of the protection. All that type of examination is useful in keeping protected industries up to a reasonable level of efficiency. It does no damage in so far as the protection which has been given in the securing of a market remains in effect while the examination is proceeding.

I have always argued in favour of examination after protection had been imposed and against examination in that public way beforehand. But, if there is to be this requirement upon people proposing to engage in industry to submit their plans to this council and have them fully investigated, I hope there is no truth in the report in the newspapers that it is intended to put upon this council a member of the Oireachtas. I cannot conceive any circumstances in which persons proposing to engage in industry would agree to have their plans investigated in that way by a person not merely active in politics, but a member of the Oireachtas. If there is to be a member of the Oireachtas, is it intended that he should have any functions in taking responsibility for the decisions of this body in the House of the Oireachtas in which he is a member? Can he be questioned there about its work and can he speak on its behalf and be regarded as its public spokesman? The report may not be correct but, if it is, I would urge the Minister to change his mind.

I have no objection whatever to any of the other names mentioned. They seem to me to be obviously indicated by their present positions and past experiences, but I think it would be very wrong to put upon a body of this kind, carrying out the functions which the Minister outlined here, a person who is a member of either House of the Oireachtas.

Mr. Connolly

The Deputy, I think, did not hear the Minister saying it would be a full-time body, and obviously it would not be compatible with the duties of a full-time body to have a member in either House of the Oireachtas.

Mr. Lemass

I agree. Deputy Connolly spoke about the need of a survey of man-power. I am not sure what he has in mind, but I think it is time that we had a thorough investigation of our live register of unemployment. I do not believe the live register is an accurate register of unemployment in this country.

Mr. Davin

When did you find that out?

Mr. Lemass

I have always asserted it. Deputies on the other side of the House are now beginning to learn that I was always right. However, I want to discuss this in a less contentious way than Deputy Davin usually deals with subjects in this House. I do not believe that the 80,000 people who are on the live register are in fact all available for work and, to that extent, the register exaggerates the number of unemployed. On the other hand, I believe there are people available for work who are not on the register. One of the most remarkable experiences in my time was that although by all our efforts in industry and otherwise we increased the average number of people at work by practically 100,000 there was no corresponding diminution of the number on the live register. It is quite clear, therefore, that there is a pool of labour available in this country which is attracted to new employment when it is created and which is not represented by the persons on the live register. When Deputy Smith was in charge of the Office of Public Works he encountered some anomalies in the administration of Government grants for one purpose or another, such as the anomaly of a Government contractor in a particular town excusing himself for the non-fulfilment of his job on the ground that workers were not available when the official register showed 50 or 100 potential workers as unemployed in the town.

Deputy Smith carried out a personal examination of the position of the live register in the year 1946 and the reports of the work done by him and his staff in that year should be available to the present Government. My recollection is that it showed that from one-quarter to one-third of the persons on the register were physically or mentally incapable of continuous employment; from one-quarter to one-third of the remainder were capable only of clerical work and certainly could not be usefully employed upon the type of work usually available under Government schemes; and that the actual number of persons that could be taken off the register by an expansion of Government or local authority activities of a constructional kind did not represent more than one-third, or from one-third to 40 per cent. of the total register. I would not, however, like the House to conclude from that that the size of the unemployment problem which we are facing is very much less than is suggested by the employment register. There is, as I have already said, that unknown pool of labour mainly in the western parts of the country, the full dimensions of which have never been measured.

Unemployment assistance in the towns is a form of help to unemployed persons; but over the whole of the west of Ireland it is a subsidy to endemic poverty and many of the people who are in receipt of it do not regard themselves as unemployed. Nevertheless, they are there available for employment and they will accept more remunerative employment if it is offered to them. There are immense difficulties in meeting the unemployment problem in the west of Ireland through industrial development. I tried to do that. It will be recognised that if anybody starts a new manufacturing enterprise in some western town he is at a disadvantage as compared with his competitor in the same industry in Dublin. I tried to meet the situation by the enactment of legislation which gave me the right to confine particular industries to those who undertook to carry them on in these western districts. There are Deputies in this House who know the abuse and misrepresentation to which I was subjected and the attacks that were made upon me on the ground that I was conferring monopolies. The sole purpose of those monopolies was to try to keep the industries in the west of Ireland. If any Deputy has the time or leisure to go back over the old debates he can read there what was said about that effort, particularly by the present Minister for Agriculture. Yet, if we are not going to reverse Cromwell's policy of "to Hell or to Connacht," there is I think only one way of getting rid of that endemic poverty in the west of Ireland and that is by industrial development based upon available mineral resources, if they are there and, if not, industrial development helped to establish itself there by the use of such special powers as the Control of Manufactures Act confers, or by other forms of assistance.

I think there is need for that examination of our man-power position which Deputy Connolly has in mind. I do feel that we have not got in relation to that particular natural resource all the information that it is desirable we should have. I note that the statistics service has been transferred from the Department of Industry and Commerce to the Department of the Taoiseach. If that is merely a change in the machinery for the administration of the Department it is of no great consequence. Deputy Connolly suggested that the scope of our statistical service should be enlarged. I think the scope of it is large enough. There have been published by our statistics service reports of a more comprehensive kind than are available in most European countries. The trouble is they do not come out quickly enough and the one need there is in relation to this statistics service is to expedite its work. We are still in the position that most of the reports consequent on the 1946 census are not yet available; so far as data relating to national income or consumption expenditure is concerned the latest year for which we have figures is 1944.

Mr. Morrissey

It is in order to remedy that situation that the change has been made.

Mr. Lemass

The point I am trying to make is that I would not urge upon the Minister to follow Deputy Connolly's advice to extend the scope of the service. I would rather urge upon him some improvement in the existing services in the matter of speed in the publication of reports. I do not think the Minister for Industry and Commerce should be unduly perturbed because industrialists and others, as he said, had doubts and expressed doubts as to the industrial policy of the Government. I think it is perhaps useful that they did so, certainly in the first months of the Government's existence, because they got from the Minister for Industry and Commerce, from the Taoiseach, and from other Ministers declarations which were essential and declarations which might not have been made if these doubts had not been expressed. I think it is desirable such declarations should be made because, no matter what the Minister for Industry and Commerce may feel inwardly about industrial development, it is not as easy as all that for his Party to lay down its past. I am not now questioning his sincerity or the sincerity of the declarations made by the Taoiseach in that regard, but I still say that where the work of the Department of Industry and Commerce overlaps the work of the Department of Agriculture or the work of the Department of Finance there is at the present time a conflict of policy apparent which is leading to dead-lock. I am prepared to support that statement by specific illustrations. I have not time to do that now and I do not propose to do it now, but I shall take the opportunity of doing it on the Vote on Account.

Mr. Morrissey

Will the Deputy give us all his knowledge and its source when he is telling us about that?

Mr. Lemass

I am certainly prepared to give the source where it is reasonable to do so. Many people come to me and discuss their industrial problems with me, but not always in a form which would enable me to use here the information which they give me. I certainly do not intend to break any confidences.

Mr. Morrissey

The Deputy knows that is what I was referring to.

Mr. Lemass

I shall certainly not make any statement here which does not appear to me to be fully substantiated by the facts as I know them. I could not understand what the Minister meant when he said there was no industrial development for the past ten or 12 years.

Mr. Morrissey

I did not say that. What I did say was that there was not that expansion of existing industries over the past ten years which one would have expected.

Mr. Lemass

I can understand that, but nevertheless——

An Ceann Comhairle

May I remind the Deputy and the House that this debate ends at 20 minutes past eight and the mover might like to say a few words.

Mr. Lemass

I shall be very brief. The most satisfactory feature of our industrial statistics is the speed with which Irish industry recovered after the war. Almost immediately after the war we were able to record a volume of industrial production higher than pre-war and, at the present time, substantially higher than pre-war. I think that is an indication that the enterprise and energy of our industrial leaders and the capacity of our workers to work were not diminished. I think Deputy Connolly completely misread the significance of the figures relating to the output per worker between 1938 and 1944.

In 1944 in many industries supernumerary workers were being employed. The output of these industries had fallen, owing to the contraction in the supplies of raw materials but there were many employers who had not reduced their staffs in proportion to that contraction in output. Consequently, you got a false picture of the number of employees in relation to output for that year. I am quite certain that the figures for 1947 and 1948 will show that there has been a substantial recovery in the output per worker employed. It may be lower than the pre-war figure but it will be higher than the 1944 figure. The 1944 figure does not indicate either a lessening in the capacity for work on the part of the workers or a lessening of efficiency in the equipment of industry.

Mr. A.P. Byrne

I am prompted to rise to utter a very enthusiastic "hear, hear!" to the statement of the Minister, when he referred to the attitude of certain sections of the purchasing public and, particularly of some distributors, towards Irish manufactured articles. It is unfortunately only true to say—and it is a sad reflection after our national Parliament has been in existence for 27 years—that there is a very big number of our distributors who push the imported article in preference to the home-manufactured article and who are inclined to say that the very fact that an article is Irish manufactured makes it an inferior article, without any further inquiry into the matter. I do not know how the Minister is going to deal with that problem or what the Dáil can do about it. The Minister referred to the necessity of educating public opinion in this regard. For my part, I merely wish to say that I agree with the Minister that it is a very sad state of affairs that such a feeling should exist amongst certain distributors in regard to Irish-manufactured goods.

Mr. Connolly

I welcome the statement of the Minister for Industry and Commerce that this motion is acceptable to him. I trust it will be duly and quickly implemented according to its terms. The Minister traversed quite a wide field, but I should like to emphasise again that it is not with the individual activities of individual fields that we are concerned in pressing this motion. What we are concerned with is to integrate all the different activities, to which he and Deputy Lemass have referred, into one economic whole. The Minister referred to several points. He talked about a geological survey with which we are all familiar, about the gypsum deposits, the coal mining industry at Castlecomer, Avoca silver mines and about the reclamation of 4,000,000 acres. He also talked about the extension of the activities of Bord na Móna. He referred to the reafforestation programme which is to be stepped up to 25,000 per year. Finally, he dealt very elaborately with the points I have raised in reference to the industrial authority. So far so good.

What we want in the survey is some method of co-ordination of these various activities. Deputy Lemass has shown himself to be an unrepentant upholder of laissez faire, a good old Liberal. He has stated that he has fought a fight for 16 years, to use his own words, against this idea of an economic council, but he has lost the fight. It was a losing fight. It was the fight of the old Liberals against the idea of a planned economy.

Mr. Lemass

It is against planning by an economic council.

Mr. Davin

In favour of planning by civil servants.

Mr. Connolly

He used the argument that it is a fifth wheel to the coach but he forgets, and those who think like him forget, that he wants an orchestra without a conductor. He states that there are bodies with adequate legal powers to do certain things, that there is a body that can carry on the exploration of mineral resources and that the Electricity Supply Board can examine into the question of the development of our water-power resources. Then he says that the other bodies that control drainage can look into and examine the possibilities of the catchment areas and so on. But these are separate activities, and the complaint inherent in the motion is that these activities went on, in so far as they did go on, without any relation one to the other, without any relation to a general economic plan for the whole of the country. That is what is desired in this motion and that is the necessity for an economic council—that there would be such a fitting together, such a dovetailing of all these plans that we shall derive some greater benefit from their exploitation than we could out of the unrelated activity of the various bodies.

We shall have the stimulus of cooperation and we shall be able to get an examination into the man-power resources of the country in certain areas such as Deputy Lemass referred to. He agreed with me on the one hand that there should be an examination into labour forces. On the other hand he did not like the idea of the development of the activities of the Statistics Branch which must be part of the work of such an authority as will be set up to take a survey of this country. These are contradictory ideas. If we want to have an examination into the figures of unemployment, if we want to get a true idea of the real hard core of unemployment, how it is constituted and how it can be broken, that is a matter that will come within the scope of the Statistics Branch.

When I talked of productivity in 1944 as compared with 1938, I was well aware of the point which the Deputy mentioned, but I was emphasising that without such an authority, we have no up-to-date information in regard to this whole matter. All his talk about an unemployment register and his exchanges with the Minister for Social Welfare on this matter had no reality because there was no such body which had conducted a survey or made an investigation which would have given us basic data, with details which would enable us to frame our policy on sound grounds. For these reasons I think it will be agreed that where you have so many conflicting forces and where so many factors have to be taken into consideration, there will always be necessity for an economic council to coordinate the activities of the various bodies we have heard mentioned here, for the common good and that is the plea behind this motion.

Motion put and agreed to.